this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
1178 points (97.7% liked)

Science Memes

11399 readers
1333 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

This is why my field (reinforcement learning) is unfortunately not science.

(Can't really publish "hey I tried this algorithm and it didn't work")

[–] overcast5348@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

...because people don't accept that it's wrong? Or some other reason?

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I guess I should've clarified; in reforcement learning "I was wrong in numerous ways" almost always translates to "unpublishable, try to not be wrong next time". Nobody cares if a reinforcement learning hypothesis didn't work, its only worth publishing if it worked well.

[–] overcast5348@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Gotcha.

I thought that was the norm in all academia these days? Can a physicist (or anyone from another field) publish results that didn't go as expected and save future scientists some time?

[–] jeffhykin@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

I know a good bit of micro biology, psychology, and medical trial fields can. But thats about the limit of my "other fields" knowledge.